Session Information
02 SES 12 A, Policy & Governance III: Apprenticeship and Occupation
Paper Session
Contribution
In the last 20 years the German education system has been subject to different political reform initiatives. Less politically controlled, however, is the so-called academisation process. This demand-driven process challenges the traditionally segregated relationship of higher and vocational education in Germany. As the term academisation has not been consistently defined, it is here used to describe the changing demand patterns and participation rates in the academic in relation to the vocational sector. In the academic sector these rates have been rising since the 1960s with a strong increase between 2008 and 2011, when the entrance rate of first year students grew from 40.3% to 55.6% (AGBB 2018, 339, 155). The developments are based on a considerable increase in the share of students especially in the last decade leaving secondary school with a university entrance qualification (AGBB 2018, 339, 155). In comparison entrance rates of first year dual system-apprentices in the vocational sector have fallen since the 1990s, mainly driven by companies’ apprenticeship and employment policies (Baethge 2015; Kuhlee 2015). In 2013, for the first time, the number of entrants into higher education exceeded the number of those entering the dual system. Baethge & Wieck (2015, translated) described this as “turning point in the German education history”, where traditionally the main qualification route is through the vocational sector and particularly through dual system-apprenticeships.
The increasing focus of young people and their parents towards career opportunities and upward social mobility is seen as a central driving force for the growing interest in higher education programmes. This can be discussed from different angles such as by Human Ressource Theory (e.g. Becker 1964) or by the changing perspective on the German concept of Bildung nowadays as qualification (Hörner 2011). In addition to the growing interest in higher education programmes, there is also a move towards more prestigious occupations within the rather segmented vocational sector. Commercial and financial occupations such as banking, for example, are considered vocational occupations at the higher end of the spectrum for which companies require university entrance certifications from apprenticeship candidates. Occupations within the agricultural sector or within retail, on the other hand, are perceived to be at the lower end, where companies require candidates to hold lower secondary school certificates to qualify for entering apprenticeships (Baethge & Weick 2015). As a result, one would expect different impact of academisation in different economic sectors dependent on (1) the traditional role of higher education in relation to vocational qualifications in each sector and (2) the kind of apprenticeships (position in the spectrum) traditionally offered by each sector.
In this context, however, certain issues on the relation between the two educational sectors have been raised. This includes the question how to bridge the two, traditionally segregated sectors and how to ensure parity between higher education and vocational qualifications. Hybrid qualifications that take vocational and academic components into account have been brought forward as a solution and are favoured by policy makers (Borgwardt 2018, DIHK 2018, Wissenschaftsrat 2014). At present, so-called dual study programmes combining company practice with academic learning processes in HE institutions (Krone 2015) are a focus of discussions. These programmes are currently in high demand by young people and highly rated by the public (Wolter 2016).
This paper discusses the impact of these developments on the labour and apprenticeship market and on vocational education. It especially focuses on the perspective of companies, their recruitment and human resource development. It differentiates between different economic sectors and considers the future role of dual system apprenticeships and their possible replacement by dual study programmes from companies’ perspectives.
Method
This paper uses empirical data of an interview study collected during the research project AkaDEmUs. This project focussed on the impact of academisation from companies’ perspective. It investigated the challenges companies are facing around their recruitment for apprenticeships and employees in the labour market and related staff development approaches. The interview study differentiates between the size of companies and their relevant economic sector. Problem-centred interviews were conducted with 29 human resources managers and trainers from four different economic sectors: industry (n=7), banking (n=7), wholesale and export (n=6), and retail (n=9). The surveyed companies included small and medium-sized companies (n=15) and large-scale companies (n=14). The survey was conducted from February to November 2016. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed based on structured, qualitative content study methodology using principles of consensual coding by Hopf and Schmidt (1993). It’s important to note that at present empirical studies about the effects of academisation and its connected developments in Germany are rare, particularly when it comes to companies’ perspectives on this issue. This paper provides insight into this under-researched field. The paper takes, however, into account findings of the few existing studies on issues of academisation and on central issues on dual study programmes in the German context (e.g. Elsholz et al. 2017, Mottweiler 2018, Hesser & Langfeldt 2017, Krone & Mill 2014, Kupfer 2013). The paper relates them to the outcomes of the interview study.
Expected Outcomes
The findings indicate that the different sectors indeed identify different aspects in the apprenticeship market and in the recruitment of apprentices as problematic. They are linked to aspirations of upward social mobility, negatively impacting on apprenticeships within the middle and lower apprenticeship segments. The industrial sector, for example, finds it difficult to recruit young people for industrial and technical apprenticeships within the middle segment, such as machine operator or precision mechanics. Respondents here indicate that young people prefer commercial to technical or craft apprenticeships. Technical and craft occupations are not seen as an option for social mobility. The banking sector in contrast, with their apprenticeship in the upper segment, sees itself in competition with higher education programmes. The respondents of all sectors, however, emphasise the importance of the dual apprenticeship system for their human resource development; the dual system is highly regarded by employers: “This dual system is worth a mint” as one of the respondents explained (translated). At the same time, dual study programmes within the higher education sector have gained relevance for employers. Respondents within the industrial sector emphasised that they only offer these places if they have to fill a specific position within their middle or higher management; respondents from within the retail sector however, and especially from the banking sector feel increasingly pressurised to offer such places due to the demand by young people. Similarly argues Elsholz et al. (2017, 29, translated): “Companies perceive themselves increasingly driven by the demand of young people and the public debate on dual study programmes.” Overall, respondents indicated the high relevance of dual apprenticeships combined with further vocational training within their human resource development portfolio. However, some sectors show tendencies to replace vocational training routes such as dual apprenticeships combined with further training with dual study programmes.
References
Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung (2018). Bildung in Deutschland 2018. Bielefeld. Baethge, M. & Wieck, M. (2015). Neue Konstellationen zwischen Berufsausbildung und Hochschulstudium: Wendepunkt in der deutschen Bildungsgeschichte. In Mitteilungen aus dem SOFI, 9(22), 2-6. Baethge, M. (2015). Die schleichende Erosion im Governance-Modell des deutschen Berufsbildungssystems. In I. Dingeldey, A. Holtrup & G. Warsewa (Eds.), Wandel der Governance der Erwerbsarbeit (pp. 273-299). Wiesbaden. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. New York. Borgwardt, A. (2014): Zu viel oder zu wenig Akademisierung?! Diskussionspapier der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in Kooperation mit dem Managerkreis, Berlin, 7. Mai 2014. Online: http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/studienfoerderung/11003.pdf (20.10.2018). DIHK (Deutscher Industrie- und Handelskammertag) (2018). Hochschulpolitische Leitlinien 2018. Positionspapier. Berlin. Elsholz, U., Neu, A. & Jaich, R. (2017). Stellenwert und Zukunft beruflicher Aus- und Fortbildungsprofile. Veränderungen infolge der Akademisierung aus Unternehmenssicht. In Berufsbildung in Wissenschaft und Praxis. 46(5), 28-31. Hesser, W. & Langfeldt, B. (2017). Das duale Studium aus Sicht der Studierenden. Hamburg. Hopf, C. & Schmidt, C. (1993). Zum Verhältnis von innerfamilialen sozialen Erfahrungen, Persönlichkeitsentwicklung und politische Orientierungen. Dokumentation und Erörterung des methodischen Vorgehens in einer Studie zu diesem Thema. Hildesheim. Hörner, W. (2011). Zur Kapitalisierung des Bildungsbegriffs. In R. Diedrich & U. Heilemann (Eds.), Ökonomisierung der Wissensgesellschaft. Wie viel Ökonomie braucht und wie viel Ökonomie verträgt die Wissensgesellschaft? (pp. 125-138). Berlin. Krone, S. & Mill, U. (2014): Das ausbildungsintegrierende duale Studium. In WSI-Mitteilungen, 67(1), 5-13. Krone, S. (2015). Neue Karrierepfade in den Betrieben: Nachwuchsbindung oder Akademisierung? In: Krone, S. (Ed.), Dual Studieren im Blick. Entstehensbedingungen, Interessenlagen und Umsetzungsverfahren in dualen Studiengängen (pp. 51-88). Wiesbaden. Kuhlee, D. (2015). Federalism and corporatism: On the approaches of policy-making and governance in the dual apprenticeship system in Germany and their functioning today. In Research in Comparative and International Education, 10(4), 476-492. Kupfer, F. (2013). Duale Studiengänge aus Sicht der Betriebe – Praxisnahes Erfolgsmodell durch Bestenauslese. In Berufsbildung in Wissenschaft und Praxis, 42(4), 25-29. Mottweiler, H. (2018). Auslaufmodell Berufsbildung? In Berufsbildung in Wissenschaft und Praxis, 47(5), 52-56. Wissenschaftsrat (2014). Empfehlungen zur Gestaltung des Verhältnisses von beruflicher und akademischer Bildung. Drs. 3818-14, Darmstadt 11 04 2014. Online: https://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/archiv/3818-14.pdf (20.03.2017). Wolter, A. (2016). Der Ort des dualen Studiums zwischen beruflicher und akademischer Bildung: Mythen und Realitäten. In U. Faßhauer & E. Severing (Eds.), Verzahnung beruflicher und akademischer Bildung. Duale Studiengänge in Theorie und Praxis (pp. 39-60). Bonn.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.